ArticleBMC ophthalmology2026
Implantable collamer lens combined with femtosecond laser-assisted arcuate keratotomy and toric implantable collamer lens for high myopia with moderate-to-low astigmatism corrections: a comparative study.
Article in BMC ophthalmology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTo compare clinical outcomes of implantable collamer lens (ICL) combined with femtosecond laser-assisted arcuate keratotomy (FSAK) and toric implantable collamer lens (TICL) for high myopia with moderate-to-low astigmatism corrections.
methodsIn this single-center, non-randomized, parallel-group study, patients with high myopia and moderate-to-low astigmatism (0.75D ~ 2.00D) received either ICL+FSAK or TICL treatment and underwent a 3-month postoperative follow-up. We compared the efficacy, safety, predictability, and stability between the two groups, along with outcomes including vector analysis of astigmatism, intraocular pressure (IOP), corneal endothelial cell density (ECD), vault, modulation transfer function (MTF) cutoff, Strehl ratio (SR), and objective scatter index (OSI).
resultsAt three months postoperatively, median manifest astigmatism in ICL+FSAK group was - 0.25 diopter (D), similar to that in TICL group was - 0.25D (P = 0.774). At all timepoints, two groups were comparable in terms of uncorrected distance visual acuity, corrected distance visual acuity, manifest spherical equivalent, manifest astigmatism, efficacy index, safety index. At 1 day, 1 month, and 3 months postoperatively, median surgically induced astigmatism in ICL+FSAK group were 0.74 D, 0.79 D, and 0.82 D, smaller than those in TICL group (0.86 D, 0.99 D, and 1.01 D) (P < 0.05). Similarly, median correction index postoperatively were 0.69 and 0.75 in ICL+FSAK group, smaller than those in TICL group (0.82 and 0.84) at 1 month and 3 months (P < 0.05). At all timepoints, no significant differences in difference vector or absolute value of angle error occurred between two groups.Similar results also occurred in IOP, ECD, vault, MTF cutoff, SR, and OSI.
conclusionsTICL resulted in higher SIA and CI compared to FSAK, but there was no significant difference in postoperative manifest astigmatism. Therefore, both methods are excellent choices for high myopia with moderate-to-low astigmatism. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ChiCTR2400092267. The registration date is November 13, 2024. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.